Re: [Starlink] Main hurdles against the Integration of Satellites and Terrestial Networks

[Inemesit Affia <inemesitaffia@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5410 bytes --]

For the US military, starlink has already allowed two antenna/terminal
manufacturers to connect to the network.

Ball aerospace for aircraft.

DUJUD(hope I got that right) for regular user terminals.

Any antenna that connects with OneWeb should theoretically work apart from
the DRM

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023, 8:36 PM David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:

> Exactly my thoughts (I haven't downloaded and read the full report yet).
> What
> are they looking to do with this 'integration'? I can integrate my
> starlink just
> like any other ISP.
>
> or are they looking at the 'cell phones to orbit' functionality thats due
> to
> roll out very suddently
>
> or are they looking for "intergration" as another way to say "force SpaceX
> to
> open the specs for Starlink and allow other user terminals to interact
> with the
> Starlink satellites?
>
> The cynic in me says it's the latter.
>
> long term it may make sense to do this to some degree, but we are WAY too
> early
> to define "Interoperability Standards" and block people from coming up
> with
> better ways to do things.
>
> the Apple vs SpaceX cellphone-to-satellite have completely different ways
> of
> operating, and who wants to tell all the Apple people that their way isn't
> going
> to be the standard (or worse, that it is and they have to give everyone
> else the
> ability to use their currently proprietary protocol)
>
> David Lang
>
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2023, Inemesit Affia via Starlink wrote:
>
> > With the existence of solutions like OpenMTCProuter, SDWAN, policy based
> > routing or any solution in general that allows combination in a sense of
> > any number of IP links, I really don't see a point for specific
> solutions.
> > Can anyone enlighten me?
> >
> > For home users an issue may be IP blocks for certain services like
> Netflix
> > when the egress is out of a VPN or cloud provider richer than a
> residential
> > provider
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023, 2:57 PM Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink <
> > starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Le 30/08/2023 à 14:10, Hesham ElBakoury via Starlink a écrit :
> >>> Here is a report which summarizes the outcome of the last Satellites
> >>> conference
> >>> [
> >>
> https://www.microwavejournal.com/articles/39841-satellite-2023-summary-linking-up
> >> ]
> >>>
> >>> The report highlights the two main hurdles against the integration of
> >>> satellites and terrestrial networks: standardization and business
> model.
> >>>
> >>> "/Most of the pushback against closer integration of terrestrial
> >>> wireless and satellite networks revolved around standardization. This
> >>> may just be growing pains and it likely reflects the relative
> >>> positions of wireless and satellite along the maturity curve, but some
> >>> of the speakers were arguing against standardization. The basis of
> >>> this argument was that the mobile industry only understands standards,
> >>> but the satellite industry is currently differentiating based on
> >>> custom systems and capabilities. The feeling was that the satellite
> >>> industry had focused on technology and not regulations or standards
> >>> and changing that course would not be helpful to the industry in the
> >>> short term. Timing is important in this analysis because almost
> >>> everyone agreed that at some point, standardization would be a good
> >>> thing, but the concern was the best way to get to the point in the
> >>> future. The other interesting argument against closer integration
> >>> between wireless and satellite had to do with the business model.
> >>> Several speakers questioned where the customers would go as
> >>> terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks become more integrated. The
> >>> underlying issues seemed to include who is responsible for solving
> >>> network issues and perhaps more importantly, who recognizes the
> >>> revenue. These issues seem, perhaps a bit simplistically, to be
> >>> similar to early wireless roaming issues. While these issues created
> >>> turbulence in the wireless market, they were solved and that is
> >>> probably a template to address these challenges for the wireless and
> >>> satellite operators."/
> >>> /
> >>> /
> >>> Comments?
> >>
> >>
> >> It is an interesting report.
> >>
> >> For standardisation standpoint, it seems SDOs do push towards
> >> integration of 5G/6G and satcom; there are strong initiatives at least
> >> at 3GPP (NTN WI proposals) and IETF (TVR WG) in that direction.  But
> >> these are SDOs traditionally oriented to land communications, rather
> >> than space satcom.
> >>
> >> I wonder whether space satcom traditional SDOs (which ones?) have
> >> initiated work towards integration with 5G/6G and other land-based
> >> Internet?
> >>
> >> Alex
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hesham
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Starlink mailing list
> >>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Starlink mailing list
> >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7407 bytes --]